Demo Data from SIGIR 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Benjamin Strauss
dblp:148/4540
· DBLP profile ↗
3ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2017
0000-0002-6856-6575ORCID · corroborated
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 2Databases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 1Applied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 1
Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.
| Artificial intelligence
1 paper |
Information extraction and text analysis · 33% Planning, search and constraint satisfaction · 33% Language models and text generation · 33% | |
| Databases, data mining, and information retrieval
1 paper |
Knowledge graphs · 50% Data mining · 50% | |
| Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
1 paper |
Software maintenance and evolution · 100% |
Topics — the 5 heaviest of 6, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Natural language and speech › Information extraction and text analysis › multilingual NLP
cognate identification |
0.3 | 1 | 2017 | Using Global Constraints and Reranking to Improve Cognates Detection · ACL (1) 2017 |
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Planning, search and constraint satisfaction
global constraints |
0.3 | 1 | 2017 | Using Global Constraints and Reranking to Improve Cognates Detection · ACL (1) 2017 |
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation
reranking |
0.3 | 1 | 2017 | Using Global Constraints and Reranking to Improve Cognates Detection · ACL (1) 2017 |
Data mining › text mining › information extraction
event extraction |
0.3 | 1 | 2017 | Learning to Extract Events from Knowledge Base Revisions · WWW 2017 |
Knowledge graphs
knowledge base population |
0.3 | 1 | 2017 | Learning to Extract Events from Knowledge Base Revisions · WWW 2017 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
learning to extract events · 0.6rescoring · 0.3reranking · 0.3global constraints · 0.3
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2017 | Using Global Constraints and Reranking to Improve Cognates DetectionabstractGlobal constraints and reranking have not been used in cognates detection research to date.We propose methods for using global constraints by performing rescoring of the score matrices produced by state of the art cognates detection systems.Using global constraints to perform rescoring is complementary to state of the art methods for performing cognates detection and results in significant performance improvements beyond current state of the art performance on publicly available datasets with different language pairs and various conditions such as different levels of baseline state of the art performance and different data size conditions, including with more realistic large data size conditions than have been evaluated with in the past. Michael Bloodgood, Benjamin Strauss |
ACL (1) | 2 |
| 2017 | Learning to Extract Events from Knowledge Base RevisionsabstractBroad-coverage knowledge bases (KBs) such as Wikipedia, Freebase, Microsoft's Satori and Google's Knowledge Graph contain structured data describing real-world entities. These data sources have become increasingly important for a wide range of intelligent systems: from information retrieval and question answering, to Facebook's Graph Search, IBM's Watson, and more. Previous work on learning to populate knowledge bases from text has, for the most part, made the simplifying assumption that facts remain constant over time. But this is inaccurate -- we live in a rapidly changing world. Knowledge should not be viewed as a static snapshot, but instead a rapidly evolving set of facts that must change as the world changes. Alexander Konovalov 0003, Benjamin Strauss, Alan Ritter, Brendan T. O'Connor 0001 |
WWW | 2 |
| 2014 | Translation memory retrieval methodsabstractTranslation Memory (TM) systems are one of the most widely used translation technologies.An important part of TM systems is the matching algorithm that determines what translations get retrieved from the bank of available translations to assist the human translator.Although detailed accounts of the matching algorithms used in commercial systems can't be found in the literature, it is widely believed that edit distance algorithms are used.This paper investigates and evaluates the use of several matching algorithms, including the edit distance algorithm that is believed to be at the heart of most modern commercial TM systems.This paper presents results showing how well various matching algorithms correlate with human judgments of helpfulness (collected via crowdsourcing with Amazon's Mechanical Turk).A new algorithm based on weighted n-gram precision that can be adjusted for translator length preferences consistently returns translations judged to be most helpful by translators for multiple domains and language pairs. Michael Bloodgood, Benjamin Strauss |
EACL | 2 |